Invalid Input

Invalid Input

Search the Remnant Newspaper
Tuesday, November 7, 2023

Dresses & Pants: The “LGBT” Movement and Blurring Gender Lines

By:   Jacinta Boudreau
Rate this item
(13 votes)
Dresses & Pants: The “LGBT” Movement and Blurring Gender Lines


When Cardinal Giuseppe Siri wrote on the topic of women wearing men's clothing in 1960, he focused largely on the psychological effects. He believed “Male dress is the visible aid to bringing about a mental attitude of being ‘like a man’ i.e., it changes the psychology of women."[1] He starts his "Notification" however, with this important statement: "The wearing of men's trousers by women cannot be said to constitute as such a grave offense against modesty, because trousers certainly cover more of woman's body than do modern women's skirts."

With all this in mind, Catholic writer and fantasy author Stefanie Nicolas (Lozinski) pointed out that:

In light of the Cardinal’s words, an important question comes to mind: Who was it who began the trend of women wearing pants in Christian societies? It should come as no surprise that it was feminist activists[2], including such big names as Susan B. Anthony and Cady Elizabeth Stanton, who first began to clothe themselves in trousers. These early advocates of trousers for women were unambiguous in their belief that women were not simply wearing pants for simple stylistic interest or even for comfort, but as part of their broader attempts[3] to craft a more “egalitarian” society. In other words, trousers began as a direct attack on natural gender roles.[4]

In the past, the term “wearing the pants” had a deeper meaning of “being the leader of the relationship or of the family,” which some early suffragettes took quite literally and donned a pair of trousers underneath their shortened dresses. Amelia Bloomer, one of the most prominent early feminists even said outright, "wearing traditionally male garments suggested an across-the-board 'usurpation of the rights of man'—notably, the right to vote."[5] However, the Church teaches that the man is the head of the family and that the two sexes are distinct from one another. Blurring the lines between the sexes is not the only tool feminists used (and still use today) to subvert society and the family, but it certainly can be attributed as a weapon in their arsenal.

If we consider the blurring of gender roles that has been occurring ever since the idea that husbands should stop being the heads of their households, we can very clearly see a descent from this to the embrace of homosexual "marriage", and today, to the "transgender" movement.

In our modern society today, corrupted and poisoned by the rejection of God and the toxicity of feminism, this question has often been asked, “if women can dress ‘like men’, why can’t men dress ‘like women’?” It’s a fair question. If we consider the blurring of gender roles that has been occurring ever since the idea that husbands should stop being the heads of their households, we can very clearly see a descent from this to the embrace of homosexual "marriage", and today, to the "transgender" movement. If gender roles can be switched, boiled down and "rewritten", why not allow men to dress like women? (I highly recommend reading Timothy Gordon's book "The Case for Patriarchy" which presents this descent into societal madness as stemming from the ideology of feminism.)

In 1938 an advice column made this assessment:

Isn’t it queer that for a boy to want to be a girl, and look like a girl, and dress like a girl is so unusual that it fills his parents with fear that he is abnormal, whereas virtually every girl in the world wishes she were a boy and the majority of them try to look like boys, and act like boys, and dress like boys? The greatest insult you can offer a man is to call him effeminate, but women esteem it a compliment to be told they have a boyish figure and that they have a masculine intellect.[6]

In an article titled, “Why Most Men Still Don’t Casually Wear Dresses,” Marlen Komar made this comment, quoting from the above advice column, “We would send a man who paraded the streets in a decollete gown and high-heeled pumps to an asylum for mental observation, whereas a girl who gets herself up like an imitation man goes scot free.” adding “Not until men can just as freely put on chiffon dresses as women could put on trousers, can we say that we have figured it out.”[7]

Interestingly, after decades of normalizing women wearing so-called “men’s clothing,” present-day psychologically disturbed men are using this as a prime excuse to wear women’s clothing.

Homosexual Billy Porter made headlines after wearing a “ball gown” style dress to the Oscars in 2019. “Women show up every day in pants, but the minute a man wears a dress, the seas part,” he lisped in an interview[8]. “If I’m over here wearing a dress, why does it matter? Any woman who puts on pants is considered strong because pants are associated with the Patriarchy. It’s like some sort of superiority complex. So a man puts on a dress and it’s disgusting; so what you’re saying is, ‘men are fabulous, women are disgusting’. I’m not doing that anymore.”[9] He then pointed out, “Look at history! Men wore dresses!” adding that “Jesus wore a dress.”

We cannot stress enough the importance of children having strong, Catholic parents (one man and one woman married to each other) who raise them to be good, Catholic, boys and girls, according to their born gender, male or female.

The same psychotic sex-perverts who claim that we should raise children to be accepting of “all genders” are dressing their own children either as unisex as possible or in clothing of the opposite gender. And by "all genders" they mean, of course, not just male and female, but their scads of made-up “genders." These abusive parents are also taking strange pride in their little boys wanting to play with makeup or wear dresses. They enjoy reading their children perverse Children’s books that teach them confusion and error, treating them like “genderless” or “transgender” children[10], and so on.  No longer can a young girl be allowed to be a tomboy without being treated like she's either a lesbian, or actually a boy on the inside and needs to go have her entire womanhood destroyed forever by doctors. These are just snippets of the whole, abusive, Satanic agenda confusing and corrupting innocent children on the most basic principles and leading them to hell in a hand basket.

 We cannot stress enough the importance of children having strong, Catholic parents (one man and one woman married to each other) who raise them to be good, Catholic, boys and girls, according to their born gender, male or female. A small part of this includes how parents dress their children, but they must also teach them to be devout Catholics and to have proper decorum. Clothing is important, on this we can agree. We can see from the behavior of the perverse mob that not only is it important, but dressing according to our state in life and our born gender is just one part of the whole picture in raising a child to be mentally, physically, and spiritually stable.

Concerning Billy Porters comments on dresses being “historically what men wore,” however, we might be tempted to say to ourselves; perhaps he has a point. After all, didn’t the great Catholic thinker and philosopher, G.K. Chesterton say:

It is quite certain that the skirt means female dignity, not female submission; it can be proved by the simplest of all tests. No ruler would deliberately dress up in the recognized fetters of a slave; no judge would appear covered with broad arrows. But when men wish to be safely impressive, as judges, priests or kings, they do wear skirts, the long, trailing robes of female dignity. The whole world is under petticoat government; for even men wear petticoats when they wish to govern.[11]

This may lead us to wonder if letting little boys dress up in little girl clothing is OK. After all, if girls dress up as boys, what is the difference? And if girls dress in pants, why shouldn’t boys dress in skirts and dresses?

We need to unpack this because of the weight of this statement and what it entails. For it seems that history and even the Church looks to be approving of men wearing “skirts and dresses” of some kind, and yet those who promote “cross-dressing” today are for the most part radical, anti-God, “LGBT” leftists. So the big question is... "is men wearing skirts historical or homosexual??"

Latest from RTV — FRANCIS TO RIG FUTURE PAPAL ELECTIONS: Will Women Choose the Next Pope?

[1] Giuseppe Cardinal Siri, "Notification Concerning Men's Dress Worn By Women" June 12, 1960. Published on

[2]  Lorraine Boissoneault, “Amelia Bloomer Didn’t Mean to Start a Fashion Revolution, But Her Name Became Synonymous With Trousers” Smithsonian Magazine, published May 24 2018

[3] Katy Steinmetz, “From Horse People to Hillary Clinton: A History of Women Wearing Pants” Time Magazine, June 14 2016

[4] Stefanie Nicolas, “Understanding Modesty: Objective Standards and Practical Insights”,  Catholic Family News, published August 14, 2019.

[5] Kimberly Chrisman-Campbell, "When American Suffragists Tried to ‘Wear the Pants'", The Atlantic,  June 12 2019

[6] The Richmond Item, Page 8, Friday, December 23, 1938

[7] Marlen Komar, “Why Most Men Still Don’t Casually Wear Dresses” Racked, published April 23 2018

[8] Cady Lang, “Here’s Why Billy Porter Wore That Remarkable Gown to the 2019 Oscars” TIME Magazine, published Feb 25 2019

[9] Harrion Walker, “Why Billy Porter Will Wear a Gown Whenever He Damn Well Pleases” Out, published July 12 2019

[10] Michael Tortorello, “How to Raise a Child Without Imposing Gender” New York Times, published March 7 2019. Nicole Darrah, “Child being raised genderless to protect from ‘unconscious bias,’ parents say” Fox News, published September 17, 2019 Annie Holmquist, “Why Do We Encourage Gender Specific Clothes for Transgender Kids, but Gender Neutral Clothes for Straight Kids?” Intellectual Takeout, published Sept 13 2017

[11] G.K. Chesterton, “What’s Wrong with the World”, 1910

[Comment Guidelines - Click to view]
Last modified on Tuesday, November 7, 2023